Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 97,449
- 73,674
- 3,645
This also is not a valid defense in any serious setting.We don't read bullshit fraudulent claims of a leftist wacko judge
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This also is not a valid defense in any serious setting.We don't read bullshit fraudulent claims of a leftist wacko judge
Don't whine when it gets bitch slapped by the appeals courtSays no serious person. And nobody takes that seriously. I don't know what else to tell you.
The appeals court will correct your viewsThis also is not a valid defense in any serious setting.
No serious person can. Because you can't make a compelling argument as to why that is.And you can't see it for what it is politically motivated
I won't, if there is a good reason.Don't whine when it gets bitch slapped by the appeals court
No serious person should take this ruling more than it being politically motivated and expect not to be over turnedNo serious person can. Because you can't make a compelling argument as to why that is.
Nobody can.
There was no jury, and don't give me the shit about Trump's attorney forgetting to fill in a box.These things are both false.
There was a mountain of evidence submitted to the court.
So much so that Engoron issued a summary judgment for 1 of the 7 claims.
Then there was a full trial for the other 6, wherein Team Trump was allowed to present their defense.
Someone is filling your head with lies.
Yes you will whine maybe not here but in your circle of cultistsI won't, if there is a good reason.
Of course, you can't present any.
The Q card?... I thought that was debunked along time ago... you guys are digging deep these days.... must be getting worried...But Qanon.com is just fine. Got it.
Yet you can't argue why.No serious person should take this ruling more than it being politically motivated and expect not to be over turned
The judge said he didn't like juries and more than likely wouldn't have allowed it.There was no jury, and don't give me the shit about Trump's attorney forgetting to fill in a box.
I have argued why, the judge was politically motivated. He used the tax assessment not the actual resale valueYet you can't argue why.
Must be frustrating, I bet.
Even though the banks, insurers and others testified they were not deceived. LOLJudge Arthur Engoron, ruling in a civil lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, found that Trump and his company deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth on paperwork used in making deals and securing loans.
see it here. Its from Trump organization business documents.
Yes. He said no jury. He thinks he's God. They're all commies.The judge said he didn't like juries and more than likely wouldn't have allowed it.
Or, in reality:The judge said he didn't like juries and more than likely wouldn't have allowed it.
He does have his cult following.Yes. He said no jury. He thinks he's God.
That isn't an argument. That is the claim you are tasked with arguing the truth of, followed by a second statement that doesn't have any effect on the other.I have argued why, the judge was politically motivated. He used the tax assessment not the actual resale value
The judge has already said he doesn't like juriesOr, in reality:
"You have probably noticed or already read that this case has no jury,” Engoron said. “Neither side asked for one and, in any event, the remedies sought are all equitable in nature, mandating that the trial be a bench trial, one that a judge alone decides."
I'm sure.He does have his cult following.
Irrelevant.The judge has already said he doesn't like juries